Can Obama Win With Half a Messaging Strategy and Half a Ticket?

No strategic counterpunch and a self-emasculating VP makes Obama's job twice as hard. If his team understood messaging, he'd be doing much better against "Me-too" McCain, the make-believe maverick.

Winning presidential campaigns have four strategic messages and two messengers. Obama's glass is half empty. Let's start with "Political Strategy 101" -- well, it should be "101" but for Democrats starting with Al Gore, it apparently has been a graduate level elective that they skipped. As psychologist and Political Brain author Drew Westen explained in Huffington Post last month:

There is a simple fact about elections that has eluded Democrats in every presidential campaign they have lost in the last 40 years: that as a candidate, you have to focus first and foremost not on a litany of "issues" but on four stories: the story you tell about yourself, the story your opponent is telling about himself, the story your opponent is telling about you, and the story you are telling about your opponent. Candidates who offer compelling stories in all four quadrants of this "message grid" win, and those who leave any of them to chance generally lose.

I'd actually put it a little differently. You need a story about yourself and a story about your opponent. And you need a counterpunch to your opponent's stories about himself and about you. Ideally, the stories can be boiled down to a catchy slogan ("it's the economy, stupid") or one or two words "compassionate conservative") that make use of the memorable figures of speech from the 25-century-old art of persuasion (aka rhetoric). Same for the counterpunch ("He was for it before he was against it.").

The word "story" here is roughly equivalent to two other popular terms -- "narrative" or "frame." It is also equivalent to rhetoric's "extended metaphor," which I argue is the most important figure of speech in my not-yet-bestselling unpublished manuscript, Politics, Religion, and the English Language.

Good candidates will pound away with a strong positive extended metaphor of why you should vote for them and with an equally strong negative extended metaphor of why you should not vote for their opponents. Winning two-term candidates, like President George W. Bush with the help of Karl Rove, will have a counter-punch to their opponent's positive and negative extended metaphors. The counterpunches always use the same figure of speech -- dramatic irony, wherein someone's words unintentionally mean something quite different from (and often opposite to) what they intended.

The goal is to find a powerful dramatic irony in their opponents' words or deeds that blow up the opposition's own extended metaphor. That always makes a great story, since it is satisfying sport for people to be hoist with their own petard or for people to be uncovered as a hypocrite.

Think Michael Dukakis in an army tank, or President Bush on the aircraft carrier with the "Mission Accomplished" banner in the background, or the Swift Boat ads run against John Kerry. Dramatic irony is the key to understanding both popular culture and politics -- but that is another post.

What Karl Rove and his disciples now running the McCain campaign figured out is that since the media doesn't really police the truth in a meaningful fashion, you can pretty much take whatever your opponent says out of context and turn that into a defining dramatic irony. Or just make stuff up entirely. The Rovian dramatic irony is almost always linked to the same extended metaphor -- the Democrat is an out of touch, intellectual elitist who is "not one of us." After seeing so many many Democratic candidates fall into this trap so easily, it is a very easy sell to the public and media, as the Rovians are proving once again. Rove's candidates, on the other hand, are always a plain spoken man (or woman) of the people.

The other point of having the four stories or frames or extended metaphors is that it makes responding to attacks very easy. If you've been rebranding McCain as the make-believe maverick then whenever he launches a phony attack, you can just point out this is more proof he is the make-believe maverick pushing the old politics, whereas you remain the one-and-only candidate of real change

Back to the four stories Obama needs.

1. He has (most of) the story about himself: "Change" or "Change we can believe in" -- although, as McCain has shown, it is not really a full frame or extended metaphor because it doesn't really connect Obama's background and values with his policies, as an ideal story would do. Thus it can be twisted into "the wrong kind of change."

2. Obama's best story is about McCain: McCain=Bush, McCain is more of the same. None of these is rhetorically memorable, though at least there are a lot of visuals and facts linking McCain and Bush. This story is, of course, mostly policy-oriented and not a character attack -- and it is certainly true that Obama is winning the policy war but losing the character war.

3. Obama, however, has no counterpunch to McCain's story (or McCain's attack on Obama). Now in part that's because McCain reversed his story from "experience" to "change/maverick." And in part it's because Obama mistakenly muzzled the 527s who would have branded McCain as the out-of-touch old-politics lobbyist-loving flip-flopper he is

It must also be said that Obama didn't have much of a response to the "experience" frame in the first place because Obama insists on calling McCain a war hero, a man of honor, blah, blah, blah. Not exactly how Rovians winners deal with the Kerry team losers. Indeed, by not forcing McCain to defend the experience frame, by buying into his McCain's frame, it was that much easier for McCain to pivot to a new message.

As I've said, Obama should be rebranding McCain as a make-believe maverick. To get in even more alliteration, I might call him "Me-too McCain" since that covers his disingenuous copying of Obama's change message and his dangerous copying of Bush's policies.

Also, Obama should have gone after McCain as an out of touch elitist -- in fact, he still can. The Obama team let Phil Gramm's "nation of whiners" and "mental recession" lines die in the ether, and seems to have dropped the blockbuster gaff of McCain forgetting how many houses he owns. Yet these fit right in with the make-believe maverick meme. I can assure you, a Rovian winning candidate would still be using those dramatic-irony gaffes regularly. Indeed, Palin continues to talk about Obama's "bitter" comment, and that is from even further back in the campaign.

4. The main reason for Obama to continue pushing the extended metaphor of McCain as an out of touch elitist, aside from the fact that it's true and powerful, is to inoculate himself against the McCain-Palin-Rove onslaught that has begun to frame him as the out of touch elitist in the campaign.

Right now, Obama is diving directly into the "too clever" and "not one of us" extended metaphor that overcame Dukakis, Gore, and Kerry. I suspect that this will be the McCain team's central frame for winning the debates even if he loses them on policy points, since that was how Bush bested Kerry strategically in the debates even though the polls seemed to indicate that, at a tactical level, Kerry won them all. But that is a long story I will come back to closer to the debates.

For now, in passing, I will just note that Sarah Palin is using almost verbatim the exact same attack that Bush used to prove Kerry is not one of us. Palin is attacking Obama's language, that he says one thing to working-class people in the heartland and another thing to his supporters in San Francisco.

I mention McCain's VP mainly to segue into Joe Biden aka "the man who wasn't there." Only lipstickgate spared us from the lead story being Biden saying, Hillary "might have been a better pick than me." The mere utterance of that self-emasculating sentiment makes it true. Needless to say, the McCain campaign immediately said:

"Barack Obama's most important decision of this election, and Biden -- the candidate he selects -- suggests, himself, that he wasn't the right man for the job, and that Hillary Clinton would have been a better choice. Biden certainly has a credible viewpoint on this."

The Biden comment suggests he is speaking from a position of great personal weakness and that he feels completely overshadowed by Palin, which could be a disaster for the VP debate. Taking nothing away from Hillary, whose credentials and experience speak for themselves -- indeed, if Obama loses it will be clear that not choosing Hillary was a mistake -- the choice of Hillary would also have allowed McCain to pivot to being the real change candidate anyway, and opened up Obama to a slew of different attacks. Though it is as certain as death and taxes that Hillary never would have said Joe Biden "might have been a better pick than me."

In any case, the Rovians always find stuff or make stuff up. If the Obama team doesn't understand political messaging, it doesn't really matter who their VP is or what how they are attacked.

Josh Marshall wondered today, "Did Biden forget to mention to Obama that he was retiring from public life in September?" Exactly. If Biden is feeling like the fifth wheel -- fourth wheel? -- he should keep it to himself, buck up, and find a damn message.

To read more from Joseph Romm, go here.

Comments

[sarobinson4320]

I've decided that I can no longer follow this election. I've had it with all of the "help" that is being given to Obama by all the arm chair quarterbacks. He is who he is. Under no circumstances would he win this election with Hilary on the ticket. She by herself and especially with Bill is to divisive. Biden at least gives him a chance.
Bottom line if Americans are stupid enough to elect McCain and Palin then they get what they deserve. This shouldn't be close but it is and I'm pretty sure that if Obama was not black he'd be much further ahead.
Regardless, I'm done. Good Luck and Blessings to you all

[londonrainbow]

Vote for O on November 4 though.

[toochie]

Too late, he's gone fishing.

[JTHC75]

Also, the biggest mistake you can make is to laugh off Karl Rove because you hate him. I see this all the time on left blogs and it drives me nuts. You can hate him and learn from him at the same time. The reality is that he's got awesome political instincts, easily the equal of Carville or Atwater. The guy prints articles all the time--read them and learn from them. The guy understands why people vote and what appeals to voters. Understand your enemy (Rove).

And stay away from Palin until you've got the right attack. People hate her so much they're cluttering up the web with stupid attacks that backfire. Christ, you really want to ridicule her small-town roots and moose hunting? Her religiousity? Her hairdo or her pregnant teen? You think that works with most voters? I don't. She's got great personal appeal and these silly tangential attacks are backfiring. People don't like her because of her policies--they like her on a gut level. You've got to attack her on a level that makes her appear like a fake (i.e. separate her from what makes people like her). The Gibson interview's great--she doesn't know what the Bush Doctrine is and tries to wing it. That's plainly apparent to me, and I actually like her. I cringed at that moment, and if I cringed, that means we've got to play that clip over and over and over.

[pmag88]

Right on the money with Palin. One of the reasons they picked her is BECAUSE she's small town.

The best we can do with her is wait until the traning wheels come off, because as was made painfully obvious during her first interview, she ain't ready to ride solo.

[JTHC75]

A Republican for Obama here.

This mini-essay is spot on. There's a reason Dems keep losing elections, and it's because you're fixated on what you think is correct and not on how voters see it.

In this election, people like Obama, but they like McCain too. How do we fix that? For one thing, there needs to be stronger emphasis on how McCain is out of touch. It doesn't have to be 100% true, it just has to be convincing. McCain doesn't know how many houses he owns. He doesn't know how to use the internet or email. This is stuff that he has said--no need to say it yourself, just run the clips over and over again. These are his Bush41 at the supermarket moments. McCain may have very good reasons why he doesn't know how many houses he owns, but it just sounds terrible to 90% of voters. If it takes twice as long to explain away a gaffe as it does to show it on screen, you've got a winner. Even the explanation (they're his wife's houses, etc.) makes him sound even more disconnected from the average voter.

[ElBruce]

That's all fine - what the real problem is that everyone in the Obama campaign feels they have to complement her before they can criticize her: "She's a very gifted, incredibly charismatic, exiting, and good-looking candidate, but..." Just cut that part out. Half of the electorate has already tuned out before you got to the "but" part of the sentence.

They just recently got over this tendency in dealing with McCain himself - "He has an incredible record of service, is the most honorable person in existence and has sacrificed more than any American, but..."

PLEASE STOP DOING THEIR JOB FOR THEM.

Just point out that they're wrong and save the glad-handling for yourselves. That is, if you want to win.

[tropos]

How true. I feel so badly let down by the Obama campaign right now. I've more or less stopped reading all newspapers, and almost all blogs (save this one once in a while when the craving for political news gets too much). The steady drip-drip of bad news for our team was getting too much.
If Sen. Obama manages too lose in November (he certainly seems to be trying hard not to win), then his campaign team and he himself should retire from politics. It would be such a tremendous let down for all the progressive people in this planet who believed in the hope.

[MariaHopeful]

So you have retired and left the fighting for others to do? You thought that a young black man with a Muslim name was just going to waltz into the 'White House? You thought that there would be no dark days? You thought that Rove and his minions have retired? OK, let's all go home and leave Obama to battle all by his lonesome because it is just too depressing to see that our man is down in the polls and the MSM and the Rethuglicans are just piling on. Let's us do that and leave a clear path for the Republicans to reap what they have sown.

Pathetic!

[serena1313]

Hear hear!!!!

[4real]

Obama has been working harder than anyone for the last two years. He won a hard fought primary against Hillary and now he is up against McCane. McCane was basically free to wonder around unblemished for like five months.

Now he has to basically regroup and figure out a way to defeat McCane. His campaign is strong and smart. I think they will hit McCane hard.

Joe does need to toughen up a bit on his language. Maybe Obama has told him to tone it down so he won't make too many gaffes. But I think it's a mistake to muzzle Joe. Let him loose and say what's on his mind. He's at his best when he talks freely.

[MariaHopeful]

I was just too disappointed to read Joe's comment. Is he not up to the task? I thought that he was a brilliant pick and if he fails it not because of Obama, but rather because Biden did not live up to expectations.

[Rescisco]

Joe Biden is setting something up. Trust me, he knows what he's doing.

[WAstateliberal]

Disagree. I was virtually alone in my horror when he picked Biden. A man whose been in Washington for 35 years? So much for the change theme. A man who is in bed with lobbyists? So much for that theme. Even worse, there is hardly anyone as gaffe-prone as Biden. I said, after he was picked, that we would have gaffe after gaffe after gaffe. Guess what? That's exactly what's happening. When he's not talking about how great Sarah Palin is, he is talking about her lipstick and her looks. I think he's a great Senator, but I can hardly imagine a worse pick. I wanted Sebelius initially, but as I look back on everything that has happened since June, I see that the pick should have been Hillary. Not even a close call. Should have been Hillary. In recent days, I have been hoping that Biden will take one for the team (fake a heart attack, solicit a prostitute, something) and go away so that we can have Hillary.

[A-Dog]

Give Joe Biden a break! At least he is out there every day, stepping out from behind the podium to answer real people's questions. Not like Palin, who is arm's length from the media, reading from the script. I'm looking for authenticity in a candidate, and I find that characteristic in Joe Biden.

His comment was in an attempt to defend Hillary. The Dems had a wealth of talent competing for the #1 and #2 spot, and he was acknowledging that.

Let's remember, the Bush Administration NEVER acknowledged personality or policy flaws for 8 years. It was too insecure to acknowledge mistakes, second-tho­ughts...Ho­ld that record up to the voters and let them decide what's more important. Biden's self-depricating comments pale in comparison.

[jsinclair]

All true. But that's not a reason for us to show weakness now.

Biden's a salesman, and his product is the Obama-Biden administration. He's got to paint a picture of them--and of the "competition"--that will make the undecided voters clinch the deal.

It's not the time for self-deprecation or introspective musings that raise questions about the flaws of your product.

Sell, sell, sell. And, yes, learn from Rove (but, luckily, Dems can stay HONEST).

[TravelDog]

I think you are about 100% wrong about Biden's comments - and their impact on most people. He was responding to someone who said that they were so glad he was picked rather than Hillary (I've only heard the question described but apparently it was negative to Hillary). She - deservedly - has his respect and also his friendship and you can hear the beginnings of anger in his voice. He also knows that one of the groups of votes they don't have are those of Hillary supporters who are still hurt and disappointed and feeling she was shoved aside because she wasn't picked. His response, and the honesty of it, won back some of those votes and increased the respect that some of us, who were not Hillary supporters but came to admire her, already have for him. His comment about her possibly being better is a self-deprecating courtesy that MANY people of his generation do and would expect to hear. Life is about more than 'gotcha' and Biden's comments were respectful and appropriate. (And don't worry about his ability to be strong on the attack - but a good warrior waits for the right moment and uses the minimum amout of force necessary. Until he and Obama know what Palin is going to be like, when she's allowed to speak, they have no idea how hard this is going to be. There's time. Read Gail Collin's article today in NYT.)

[Fabienne]

It wasn't the most tactful comment in the world, however, no matter what his intent, and does give fodder to those who never want to let go of the Clinton issue.

[LizM]

I couldn't agree more! Thank-you for saying what I couldn't.

[WAstateliberal]

I agree the author is taking Biden's comment out of context--which is his whole point. That's what Rovian winners do. They spin. The media cares not one iota about truth or facts. They are lazy, and accept the spin they are given. So you know what you do? Don't give them anything to spin. Biden should have known that comment would be twisted, and if he didn't he has the political instincts of a corpse.

[editrix66]

Biden was trying to be gracious. I think he is a great choice. Yes, the Republicans can twist his words, but it will blow over, especilly after the debate.

[LizM]

Very well said...you and Senator Biden are certainly far more gracious than I have been of late (see my comment below).

I guess the frustration level has become too much for this Biden supporter - that's my excuse, anyway...a­nd I'm sticking to it!

[LizM]

...very well said...you and Senator Biden are far more gracious than I have been, of late (see my comment below). I guess the frustration level has finally begun to bubble over for this Biden supporter. Anyway, that's my excuse and I'm sticking with it!

[WAstateliberal]

He's gonna get killed in the debate. Why? Because conventional wisdom has already declared him the loser and he can do nothing to turn it around. What's more, the whole debate will be just one big Biden gaffe. Guarantee he will say something that very nearly ends this campaign (just like when he made the Obama-gaffe that DID end his presidential campaign).

And after tonight's cringe-worthy interview on ABC, the expectations for Palin will be so low that he would have to beat her by leaps and bounds to be deemed the winner. And if he beats her by leaps and bounds, he is a sexist bully beating up on the soccer mom. Get it? If he loses he loses, and if he wins he loses.

The modern day Democrats remind me of obstinate prosecutors (like Marcia Clark) who refuse to work with jury consultants because they think they can just do it themselves. They can't. They need people with psychology credentials and experience at actually winning an argument (like Vincent Bugliosi) advising them.

[LizM]

I hear what you're saying about Biden and I understand exactly where you're comments are coming from. But, you're right about one thing...I know who Joe Biden is and what he is all about. I know what motivates Joe Biden. Hillary Clinton is no Joe Biden!

[WAstateliberal]

I don't know what you're getting at here. Your alluding to a personal relationship with the Senator. And then you don't reveal what the personal relationship says about him.

Not picking Hillary could very well cost him this election. None of this would be happening right now if he had picked Hillary. Mind you, I was staunchly, rabidly against him picking Hillary back in May/June because I believed that the things she said in the primary about Obama prevented him from even considering her. By the end of July, it became clear he really needed her and things had blown over. And now, we know that this campaign would be totally different if she was on the ticket. For example, she fights, and we need a fighter right now.

[LizM]

...persona­l relationship? ...please.­.. :rolleyes:

I have been following Senator Biden's career for more than 20 years now and what you don't know about him is an awful lot! I don't know where you are getting your information about him but you should know that what the media and blogosphere say and write about him is largely INACCURATE and often comprises all out FABRICATION.

I suspect that if you really knew who Joe Biden was or even paid attention to what he has been saying on the trail since he was tapped as running mate (the media and blogosphere, btw, have continued to ignore and dismiss him as the VP nominee), then you would feel the same way as me.

[truegreen]

I will concede Biden's comments struck me as a bit weird, but one should not read into it.

[Boadicea]

Talk about reframing.­...

Instead of challenging the disproven notion that being gentlemanly is being weak, Democrats without fail fall right into the Republican definitions of strength. No wonder we lose. Our supporters believe the Republican framing of our candidates, and lose enthusiasm, as this author has.

Biden was being a gentleman. He was being as respectful as he could be about Hillary. He has humility, a trait I admire. He can be and has been extremely tough and strong. But this author, and others who have criticized Biden, have swallowed the Republican bait hook, line and sinker.

Redefine what it means to be a strong man. The rest of the democratic world did, a long time ago, and as a result, their tax dollars benefit them, not the wealthy shareholders of a gargantuan military-industrial complex.

[Fabienne]

Excellent, Boadicea.

[RI]

I have also contemplated the 4 stories angle.

Unfortunately, what is more important is not "Is it true," but rather "Which stories stick?" Which ones resonate with the emotions. Hope gets many people, fear gets more.

So, I think Obama's "Change we can believe in" is good, but the attack on Obama that he is "different" (feel free to fill in "elitist," " Muslim terrorist," "alien," etc.) is stickier. Even though people want change, they fear what is new.

McCain's story of "reform" is a less scary version of change. But Obama's counter of "Enough!," that McCain = "more of the same" is also sticky. That will stoke the fear of more trauma like we have had the last few years.

[schatsie]

look it is time to paint the repugs as what they are elitist, and protax. If Bush had wanted to stimulate the consumer side of the economy, he would have reduced OBAMAs tax package which reduces taxes for the bottom 95%

John McCain the THIRD, John McCain owns 7 houses AT LAST COUNT, John McCain got HOW MUCH IN NEW TAX BREAKS under BUSH... John McCain's wife took drugs that were tax deductible­...(she should be in jail with Rush and she should pay taxes on the personal expenses for the charity that related to the drugs...Sh­e should be in jail for forging perscriptions repeatedly­.)

I don't want to be Rush on the left, but by GOD I DO NOT WANT FOUR MORE YEARS!!!

[NewAmerican]

Biden was complimenting Hillary. If he had said, I would have been better than Hillary, it would have offended the Hillaryites.

[dontomas]

I agree. It was a positive message for Biden which even hard core Hillaryites enjoy hearing.

[Fabienne]

All 36 of them?